As a political transaction, if anything, Musk paid very little for what he got.

> As a political transaction, if anything, Musk paid very little for what he got.

I think the fact that he tried to get out of it, indicates that this wasn't a long term plan, though he did eventually make political use out of it.

There was no harm in trying to get out and potentially buying it at a half price. He tried and failed.

Musk didn't intend to buy Twitter. That's incredibly clear from his statements in and out of court in the months leading up to the purchase. (Also, the fact that he had to be dragged into court.)

Musk being Musk, however, once he was forced to, made lemonade from lemons.

Financing stochastic terrorism ain't cheap, and a lot of innocent people get caught up in the crossfire of his personal family feuds against the "woke mind virus".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic_terrorism

>Stochastic terrorism is a form of political violence instigated by hostile public rhetoric directed at a group or an individual. Unlike incitement to terrorism, stochastic terrorism is accomplished with indirect, vague or coded language, which grants the instigator plausible deniability for any associated violence. A key element of stochastic terrorism is the use of media for propagation, where the person carrying out the violence may not have direct connection to any other users of violent rhetoric.

MSNBC guest accuses Musk and Libs of TikTok of promoting 'stochastic terrorism' on Twitter. Kristofer Goldsmith claimed Elon Musk is deliberately trying to turn Twitter into a 'raging cesspool':

https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-guest-musk-libs-tiktok-p...

>An MSNBC guest accused Elon Musk of promoting "stochastic terrorists" like Libs of TikTok to cultivate an "extreme far-right audience" on Twitter Monday.

>During a segment on "Deadline: White House" focused on the emergence of extremist groups in the U.S., host Nicole Wallace asked self-declared fascism-fighter Kristofer Goldsmith to discuss how Musk's purchase of Twitter has contributed to the issue.

>"Elon Musk is very deliberately cultivating an extreme far-right audience, and very specifically an anti-trans audience," Goldsmith, who serves as CEO of Veterans Fighting Fascism, responded.

>Goldsmith claimed that Twitter accounts like Libs of TikTok and Gays Against Groomers created a "trans panic" online by using "slurs to try to dehumanize trans-Americans and trans individuals abroad and say that they're predatory toward children." He also blamed them for causing alleged threats against "drag events."

>Both accounts repost others' social media content to expose members of the LGBTQ+ community and others who espouse radical views to children.

>"What they’re doing is they’re taking this like QAnon myth, their Pizzagate pedophile conspiracy theory…and they’re mainstreaming it. All through what has become one of the most, whether we like it or not, important social media platforms in existence," Goldsmith said.

>According to his website, Goldsmith, who has made frequent appearances on MSNBC, describes himself an "investigator and consultant who takes an unconventional approach to fighting against domestic fascist organizations and unlawful militias."

>Goldsmith told Wallace that he believes Musk is intentionally destroying Twitter and turning it "into a raging cesspool because Elon thinks he has something to gain from the chaos."

>"That is why he is promoting not just stochastic terrorism on his own, but he’s interacting with stochastic terrorists like Libs of TikTok and Gays Against Groomers and all of these other far-right activists who single out the trans community and the broader LGBTQ+ community with acts of violence and threats of violence," he alleged.

>Libs of TikTok, which boasts over 1.4 million followers on Twitter, was suspended six times prior to Musk's takeover for allegedly violating the platform's "hateful conduct" policy. The second installment of the "Twitter Files," revealed last week that Twitter internally acknowledged that the account had "not directly engaged in behavior violative of the Hateful Conduct policy" but still proceeded with the suspensions anyway.

>The account publicly thanked Musk for giving her a sense of "vindication" by publicizing Twitter's internal communications.

>"They suspended me multiple times knowing I never violated any policies. This is what happens when you talk about things that they don’t want you to talk about," she wrote on Twitter. "So glad those days on Twitter are over. Thanks @elonmusk."

>Musk responded to her post, promising to make Twitter "much better" under his leadership.

>"You’re welcome. Twitter won’t be perfect in the future," he tweeted, "but it will be much better."

“Tremendous power” you say?

Musk is a lightning rod. Surely he must realize that after he has served his purpose, he will be cast aside and likely end up imprisoned if not worse, right?

Have people paid no attention to what happens to almost everyone in Trump's orbit? In Musk's case it will be hugely politically valuable to use him as a sponge for anger, pretend that he was free-ranging, and cast him aside. Therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia. We've seen this pattern with Trump time and time again, and it's amazing that Musk seems so completely delusional about this guaranteed outcome.

Both have absolutely colossal egos. Both demand being the centre of attention at all times, and both have a weird Mafioso "family dynasty" thing going on. I mean, look at Musk dropping in on various Trump meetings. I don't think you could say he was being sycophantic at all, but quite contrary is giving off major "these are my employees" energy.

Add that Musk is increasingly whiny. He's starting to realize that the people aren't going to love him for the things he is doing, and he's realizing this isn't the long term advantage he thinks.

At some point, sooner rather than later, they're going to disagree on something. It might not even be a big thing. The egos will clash, Musk will be declared a "RINO" (like almost 100% of Trump's first cabinet and underlings) and every protection will evaporate.

This matters less than you think. Trump has no problem setting aside his ego to further his agenda. Remember his leaked calls with the Mexican president? Remember his submission to Putin in Helsinki? His entire cabinet is made up of people who have trashed him, his own VP called him literally the next Hitler. Trump acts very rationally when it comes to power dynamics, casting off Elon only creates problems for him, no benefits.

> but quite contrary is giving off major "these are my employees" energy.

That's just the vibes you're picking up, Trump doesn't care about this, he's the one sitting at the desk. What he cares about is the unending stream of praise that Elon glazes him with. "Trump was right about everything", "Trump is the greatest president ever", walking around in Trump swag etc etc. Allowing Musk to crash a couple meetings with the press means nothing.

> and he's realizing this isn't the long term advantage he thinks

Elon is all-in, he's burned every other bridge, a Trump alliance is the only long-term advantage he has.

> Musk's "favorability rating" is collapsing (currently -19 and dropping).

Except with Trump's base, where it has climbed from -10 to +50. There is close to 0 possibility of Elon being jettisoned.

Everything Trump does -- on geopolitics, trade, business, law -- is 100% based upon his ego. Trump's bizarre hostility towards Canada and Europe is not based upon reality, it's based upon how Trump feels they have treated him (look at Trump's endless attacks on Canada...while the US has a $100B trade deficit with Vietnam of all places). Zelensky has thanked Americans and America endlessly, but to Trump and his puppy Vance, it's about thanking them personally.

Trump's ego is the root of literally everything the US does now. The world power being led based upon this clown's mafiosa type behaviour, which apparently the majority of America is happy to go along with. The guy sharpies maps and lies with every utterance if it serves his ego (in a manner that breaks the average person's brain, unable to comprehend that someone could be so insanely deceptive always, so they assume he surely can't be and it must be everyone and reality that is wrong). He holds laughable fake golf championships, that he of course wins on every outing. He posts fake man of the year magazine covers. It would be laughable if it wasn't so profoundly tragic.

All of the members of Trump's team have to subjugate themselves and metaphorically lick his toes at every meeting, in a scene that would make North Korea look on with shame.

EDIT: The US government just published the DNS for trumpcard.gov, likely for their "sell citizenship for $5M" hilarious plan. For anyone to seriously downplay this sociopath's extraordinary ego and need to be pandered to constantly is amazing.

>"Trump was right about everything"

Surely you realize that Musk's actual message was that he, Musk, was right about everything, right? Musk is happily going with this Trump is my puppet thing, and nonsense like this is Musk making it his own and about himself. Similar to how he often wears a black MAGA hat, because he's trying to make the cult his own. He won't succeed.

>Except with Trump's base, where it has climbed from -10 to +50. There is close to 0 possibility of Elon being jettisoned.

Sure, in the same way that Republicans suddenly hate Zelensky. The cult will follow whatever the cult leader demands.

With every passing month those big DOGE savings aren't going to materialize -- oh the excitement they all had for those imaginary $5000 DOGE savings checks they would get -- government will continue to fall apart, trade wars will put millions out of work and stagflation is going to go nuts, Americans will realize they are a global pariah (hey, but they've got El Salvador and Russia, so there's that), and things will turn really quickly. Musk will be an easy bit of chum to toss in the water. Trump loses nothing.

We'll revisit this. Musk absolutely will not last the term, and I doubt he'll make it to midterms. And when he is jettisoned, he should realize the outrageous, perilous danger he will be in.

You don’t think it helps his ego to bring these folks to heel? To make Marco Rubio preside over the destruction of a foreign policy system he personally values?

> Except with Trump's base, where it has climbed from -10 to +50.

The same folks suddenly hate Canada. They swing, wildly. The core principle is “what is Trump saying today” - what he said yesterday is unimportant.

If Trump turns on Musk, so will they.

This is not to say that there won’t be a breakup, there may yet be. But it seems like Musk was able to parlay his Twitter investment into tremendous direct influence over the government, a pearl without price. I don’t know that he ever cared whether Twitter made money or not.

Musk is very exposed to Trump now: he needs pardons or abeyance of enforcement for DOGE, all of his companies are exposed to multiple regulators, and he depends on government contracts. A lot of the money he throws around in politics is leveraged on his stock holdings, so a regulatory move which affects that would also cut into his ability to fight back.

In contrast, while Trump was somewhat addicted to X he doesn’t need it after the election the way he did before and he’s shifted a lot to Truth Social. Before the election, he depended on Musk’s money but he’s been taking in a huge war chest which he can use to keep Republicans in line, too.

If Trump turned his cult against Musk, Musk would be done. Immediately all of the bootlickers and retweeters would deride everything Musk has said or done. Musk's money would be meaningless, and he'd be the next "Soros" in their minds.

Musk clearly cares incredibly about whether Twitter makes money, and has been desperately flailing around to try to make it viable. They're currently suing advertisers who don't advertise there, which is farcical. Musk really believed his grand "we'll be your bank!" thing would be some simple thing (because everything is super easy to do for someone who doesn't actually understand or do any of it)

The idea that X had any influence on the election is laughable.

2. Even if it were somehow representative, is it more plausible that all of these people were on X getting these ideas (a platform that is small relative to other media), or that these ideas were simply blasted everywhere?

3. And even if it were somehow representative, and they did get those ideas from X, what makes you think that not having those ideas "false" ideas would have changed the election outcome [1]? People more often use "facts" to justify political positions they've already made, not the other way around.

[1] https://time.com/7263845/facts-dont-matter-misinformation-es...

Likewise, the idea that a hammer has influence on building a house is laughable. But, of course, that is not what was said. It was said that Elon Musk had influence, helped by tools like X.

I fully expect that "Elon is gonna come and clean up all the useless jobs in government just like he did at X!" won a lot of votes. So, while X itself has no influence – it is inanimate, it was undoubtedly an important tool in allowing Musk to achieve the influence he offered.

> it was undoubtedly an important tool in allowing Musk to achieve the influence he offered.

I doubt it completely, mainly because there is no evidence of this, but please do cite the evidence that convinced you of this. Until then, I'll consider the most plausible scenario to be that this is a convincing story you've told yourself because social media is likely a big part of your life, and the lives of your immediate social circle, so of course you would think it was important, despite X/Twitter's relative unimportance compared to other social media.

Sure. I can agree that "He used a hammer to help build that house" and "A hammer was an integral part of building that house" can be taken to mean the same thing. So it follows that X was an integral part of getting Trump elected by way of Musk using it to convince people that he has some kind of skill in hacking and slashing jobs thus being able to do the same in government.

> mainly because there is no evidence of this

You didn't hear Trump say that he would call upon Musk to do reduce government operations? – what at some point was labelled DOGE? In fact, he even followed through with it! This is all news to you?

> this is a convincing story you've told yourself because social media is likely a big part of your life

It was a convincing story reported in the mainstream press. I don't live in the US, so maybe it has all been made up – I'm not there to witness anything else, but the idea that the press would create "fake news" is more of a US thing that maybe you’ve fallen prey to. Our media outlets still have credibility. If you know something else to be the case, it is you who should be telling me. Me "proving" it to you makes no sense. You clearly didn't think that one through.

This is why he wanted to backout. The metrics had changed, by no fault of Twitter or him.

I think people completely forgot about this part: After the initial offer he tried to back out of it, saying Twitter wasn't actually worth that much. Twitter sued Musk to force the deal through, and it was finalized after months in court.